DEVIKADEVI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is the proprietor of Krishna Cement Traders carrying on business at 10 Cavasji Patel Street Sheel chambers Bombay challenges by way of the present petition an order passed by the Collector Junagadh dated 12-3-1982 under sec. 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act by which the Collector held that the petitioner has contravened the provisions of Gujarat Essential Articles (Licensing Control and Stock Declaration) Order 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the Control Order). The Collector consequently ordered confiscation of 42 658 begs of red cement (2500 tonnes). The said order of confiscation was confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge Junagadh in criminal appeal No. 26 of 1982 taken out under sec. 6-C of the said Act. The petitioner has also challenged the aforesaid appellate order in the present proceedings. ........ ... .... .... .....

(2.) A few relevant facts leading to the present proceedings deserve to be noted at the outset. The petitioner is carrying on business at Bombay. She deals in purchase and sale of cement in the name and style of Shree Krishna Cement Traders at Bombay. In the course of her business she used to purchase manufactured cement from Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries Limited which has its registered office at Ranavav in this State. She had placed orders for purchase of coloured cement or red cement from the said manufacturing concern in the months of December 1981 and January 1982. Pursuant to the purchase orders placed by the petitioner with the aforesaid manufacturer about 14000 tonnes of red cement were supplied to the petitioner by the said manufacturer. Majority of cement purchased by the petitioner was already transported to Bombay but about 21132.9 tonnes of cement represented by 42 658 bags (actually 44030 bags) of red cement were found lying at Porbandar and Ranavav when two different godowns were raided by the officers of the civil supply department of the State of Gujarat on 3-2-1982. It was felt by the raiding officers that the said cement was stored without licence which was required to be obtained under the provisions of the control order of 1981. The stored quantity of cement was seized by the said officers under a panchnama. These cement bags were left in the custody of the persons who were in charge of the godowns and they were made to hold charge for and on behalf of the department. It appears that the present petitioner moved this court on or about 10-2-1982 by filing a writ petition praying for several declarations pertaining to the aforesaid seizure order. In the said proceedings it was contended on behalf of the respondents that the Collector had yet to adjudicate the question as to whether the seized cement bags were liable to be confiscated or not. Under these circumstances the petitioner withdrew the petition at that stage and the Collector Junagadh was directed to complete the confiscation proceedings within a stipulated period. Accordingly Miss Manjula Subramaniam the Collector Junagadh who is respondent No. 2 in the present proceedings issued show cause notice to the petitioner on 4-3-1982 calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the seized cement bags should not be confiscated on the allegation that provisions of clause 3(b) of the control order were contravened by the petitioner while she stored 42 658 coloured cement bags without obtaining necessary licence for the same. The inquiry proceeded before the Collector. Evidence was recorded by the second respondent in the said inquiry and thereafter the second respondent passed the impugned order dated 12-3-1982 by which she held that the provisions of the control order were contravened by the petitioner when she stored the concerned cement bags in the two godowns at Porbandar and Ranavav without obtaining requisite storage licence from the concerned authorities. Accordingly she directed that the seized cement bags should be confiscated to the State under sec. 6A of the said Act.

(3.) The petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the learned Sessions Judge at Junagadh under sec. 60 of the said Act. The said appeal came to be dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge on 16-4-1982. That is how the petitioner has landed in this court invoking its powers under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India for getting the impugned orders quashed and set aside and for getting a declaration that the seized cement bags are not liable to be confiscated under the provisions of the said Act read with the control order promulgated there under.